Parental leave
There aren’t many reasons that I would consider renouncing my citizenship and moving out of the US, but our country’s policy on parental leave is one of them.
My former employer threatened to FIRE me when I announced my first pregnancy. Not right away, of course. But after my supervisor advised HR of the situation, I was told that they would likely hire someone to replace me after I left to have Tacy.
I was shocked. Not only because of the perceived betrayal, but because I couldn’t believe they didn’t realize what a legal minefield they had entered. I’m not litigious, but I don’t advise backing me into a corner when I’m four months pregnant and I’ve done nothing but work my ass off for a year and a half. I never actually threatened legal action, although I did tell my supervisor – long distance, as all of my management was in LA – that what he was planning to do was illegal. But I kept that undesirable Plan B in mind while I did my best to negotiate a conversion from contract employee to full-time employee status.
That was the reason they thought they could fire me – that I was a contractor. Never mind that I had been working there for a year and a half. Never mind that I had performed beyond expectations. Never mind that I thought of myself as an employee and that I had been up-front with my management regarding my preferences – that remaining a contractor was to my financial advantage, but that remaining with the company was my top priority – and that I had actually ADVISED my supervisor that I was planning to start a family. Certainly not any of his business, but I was concerned about making sure I had my bases covered. So much for honesty and full disclosure.
They did convert me, but I wasn’t eligible for FMLA or paid leave. I hauled my pregnant ass to work and back until I hit the 40-week point, which fell on the same day that I had been an employee for 20 weeks, which meant that I was now entitled to four weeks of short-term disability at 60% of my salary. (That salary was also about 60% of my annual gross earnings as a contractor. Sigh.) The rest of the time off was unpaid. I realize that I was lucky; many women don’t receive any compensation – paid leave, short-term disability, or otherwise. Before FMLA, many women couldn’t even be sure they’d HAVE a job when they returned.
I went back to work when Tacy was eight weeks old. Again, I realize that I was one of the lucky mothers in the US. Many others have to return much sooner, leaving their newborn in the care of someone whom they barely know, let alone trust.
With CJ, I was even luckier. By the time I went back to work, Kyle had already left his job in NJ and was able to stay with her until we moved to Colorado, where I was then able to stay with her until last month.
The bureaucracy and associated paperwork that accompanies parental leave strikes me as terribly unfair. Why does it have to be so difficult and so time-consuming simply to ensure that you are taking care of yourself and your family, especially at a time when you are least equipped to handle such tasks (in the final weeks of pregnancy and in the early weeks of new motherhood)?
I’m not in the business of public policy, and I have no desire to debate the pros and cons of greater government involvement in health care, either as it pertains to parental leave or in general. I think those on the far right believe that mothers shouldn’t be working so there’s no reason to levy taxes to raise revenue to take care of women who shouldn’t need the benefits anyway. And I think those on the far left believe that aiding the welfare of the collective is everyone’s responsibility, even if that means that taxes are levied on those who will not be directly benefitted by how that revenue is spent. I don’t agree with either view, and I would bet that most of the general population doesn’t either.
But sadly, I don’t expect that the situation will change much, at least in the near term. Granted, there’s been a great deal of progress since the parents of the baby boomers were dealing with these issues, especially since many of those mothers got into the workforce in World War II (and some of them actually stayed). FMLA was the latest achievement, and while I certainly don’t mean to belittle its significance, the process of actually TAKING leave under the FMLA is unnecessarily complicated, and there’s not even any compensation involved.
In the meantime, in my cynical view, I’m happy to have survived my two episodes of parental leave, despite contending with the hurdles described above. I know that I had it easy compared to most women in the US, but I still believe it should have been easier. Perhaps someday it will be.
January 22nd, 2006 at 11:23 pm
Let’s hope compassionate parental leave of at least three months for the mother and a month for the father will become the norm by the time your children have children. This country should be ashamed of its lack of empathy for new parents.
January 23rd, 2006 at 7:10 am
Great post. I’m one of the lucky ones who works for the state government and got paid full salary for my entire time off.
January 23rd, 2006 at 7:12 am
Great post. I’ve had a similar one (actually a series on healthcare etc.) brewing for a while, I just have been too lazy to get all my research and thoughts put together. I also have been luckier than many mothers in this country, but only had 8 paltry weeks of leave with Baby-A, and even that caused me to go into the hole on my sick leave (it’s taken over a year and I still haven’t started accumulating leave again.) I don’t know how all of this could change — I don’t think it will — but it’s a sad state of affairs.
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:23 am
Oh Julie, I could tak with you about this for hours. How anti-woman all of this legislation is – espceially poor women and those working in companies which have fewer than “X” employees, so they don’t have to comply, so people who are in “KEY” positions so they don’t Have to be granted leave.
We are, in fact, on our countdown to Canada now…
January 23rd, 2006 at 12:39 pm
Yeah, I like the way most companie file it under “disability”, the same as a broken leg or bad back.
The company I worked in prior to the birth of Branch and Blossom was definitely not family friendly. Actually, it may have just been that department, since the company is very well-known in this area and would be doing itself a great disservice by getting a reputation for being family-unfriendly.
Despite the advances in women’s rights in the past few years, it’s still amazing that women get discriminated against for having children.
January 23rd, 2006 at 1:22 pm
Right on Sister. That shit makes me want to move to Sweden. It is seriouslt ridiculous, and I was able to take a full maternity leave for 8 weeks at 60% of my pay.
January 23rd, 2006 at 7:43 pm
this is what really, really worries me about working for a single-person office–and by that i don’t mean a lot of single people, i mean me and the boss make up the whole friggin’ office. he doesn’t have to give me anything more than my 2 weeks’ vacation if he doesn’t want to. which makes me think i might have to move on sooner than later if i want a second…
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:10 pm
Well said. I think the situation is improving, but not nearly fast, or widespread enough. I know there are lobbyists out there working on issues like this but I need to be more informed about who they are and how I can get involved to help affect a change to an issue that touches all of us.
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:56 pm
I don’t agree with either far-side view either, but I can’t come up with a good solution! There have been “personal time” proposals to take the place of those who decide not to have children, but I don’t know how that would work.
For both my kids, I was not in a postion where I could actually take vacation. I couldn’t just focus on my newborn (and all the work that creates.)
For my first, I was a student on stipend and was therefore not allowed time off. (As it happens, I left the program and moved across the country, so what would have been “maternity leave” was actually “packing to go across the country”)
For my second, I was (and still am) working part-time in a very small company that is small enough to dodge maternity-leave requirements. Plus, I figured training someone would take more effort than just doing it myself. So I started back to work a day after I got home from the hospital. I told my web clients I’d be out of commission for awhile, but the day-to-day bookkeeping that I do for the company continued as normal.
I certainly wish things could change to allow both mother and father some “bonding time,” but I don’t know how to do it to make it “fair” to those who don’t have children. There are already people who complain that the ones with the kids can leave early for a doctor appt or school recital. But on the flip side, it is the ones that don’t who get promoted…
January 24th, 2006 at 1:45 pm
Amen — and you could write almost the same post on the availability and affordability of decent child care.
January 24th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
I think in France you can take 3 years off and they keep your spot (?). I wish we can all get 4 months off – I’d even take 50% salary!
January 25th, 2006 at 6:38 am
Our parental leave policies are pathetic and anti-family. In all of my management jobs I’ve given my staff of
women (and men) an additional six weeks “work from home” to follow the six weeks of parental leave. Frankly people need six months off but that’s another story. I suffered terribly when I went back to work after three months.Good topic to bring up.
January 25th, 2006 at 8:34 am
Oh another thing I read awhile ago is that some companies are dropping health insurance coverage for spouses. If that doesn’t discriminate against a stay-at-home parent, I don’t know what does.
January 25th, 2006 at 9:28 am
Here in Canada you get 9 months paid “parental” leave (meaning the father can take it instead of you, and I know a guy who did this), and then an additional 3 months of unpaid-but-they-hold-your-job.
It’s super, I’m 100% in favor of it, but it also generates a big tax burden, so that’s an obstacle to this kind of thing being passed in the US, I think. And I can’t say that it never crosses my mind that I should get a job and then get pregnant again, just so I can get my maternity leave, since I’m paying for it. My son was born in the US, so I never got mine.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:25 pm
This is one of the issues which really burns me up, this and health insurance-compared to a lot of other countries we are severly lacking in these departments. It’s pretty obvious that men run this country. Rich men.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
Rachel, thanks for the Canadian perspective. I was hoping you and/or JenB would weigh in.
November 22nd, 2006 at 7:32 pm
Just to correct something Rachel said -
Canada’s maternity leave system actually creates no tax burden whatsoever. All employees are required to pay into a government-administered Employment Insurance Program. It’s pretty cheap, but means that, at any time in your working life, you can get about half your salary for limited periods of time if you:
1. lose your job (but are not fired)
2. become disabled
3. need to care for a sick relative
4. Work seasonally, such as fishermen
5. Have a baby or adopt a baby (50 weeks of paid leave, all together, plus more if you’re sick)
etc.
If you do not pay into the system, you do not get benefits. It’s NOT a tax, and puts no burden on the general tax system at all.